Taking one step further the courts' determination that standardized tests may be unduly discriminatory because of cultural or racial bias, the authors of this paper argue that tests that require severely physically handicapped individuals to make motor or verbal responses under conditions that have been standardized for learners with no motoric problems are equally discriminatory. Suggestions are presented for modifying existing test instruments to obtain more accurate and valid measures of the functional level of severely physically handicapped learners.
Larry P. v. Riles. Preliminary injunction 343 F. Supp. 1306 (N.D. Cal. 1972) aff'd 502 F. 2nd 963 (9th Cir. 1974).
2.
Diana v. State Board of Education. Civ. Act. No. 70-37 RFT (N.D. Cal. Jan. 7, 1970, and June 18, 1978).
3.
SattlerJ. M.Intelligence test modifications on handicapped and nonhandicapped. Final Report. Foundation, Ca.: San Diego State University, 1972. (ERIC document No. 095-673).
4.
LanglesB.Functional assessment of the braindamaged physically handicapped child: Cognitive, communication, and motor variables. Paper presented at the Annual International Convention, Council for Exceptional Children, Chicago, April 4–9, 1976. (ERIC document No. 122-493).
5.
MaheadyL.SainatoD.DuncanD.SbardellatiE.Educational and psychological assessment of a severely involved cerebral-palsied child: A case study. Burlington, Vt.: Center for Developmental Disabilities Monograph Series, 1981.
6.
AmmonsR. B.AmmonsC. H.Quick Test. Missoula, Mt.: Psychological Test Specialists, 1962.
7.
AllenR. M.JeffersonT. W.Psychological evaluation of the cerebral-palsied person. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, 1962.
8.
BurgemeisterB. B.BlumL. A.LorgeI.The Columbia Mental Maturity Test. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1972.
9.
DunnLloyd. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Circle Pines, Mn.: American Guidance Services, 1965.
10.
IrwinO. C.HammillD. D.An abstract test for use with cerebral-palsied children. Cerebral Palsy Review, 1964, 25, 3–9.
11.
LindsleyO. R.Direct measurement and protheses of retarded behavior. Journal of Education, 1964, 147, 62–81.
12.
SalviaJ.YsseldykeJ. E.Assessment in special and remedial education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1978.
13.
SattlerJ. M.TozierL. L.A review of intelligence test modifications with cerebral-palsied and other handicapped groups. Journal of Special Education, 1970, 4, 391–398.
14.
SeligmanM. E. P.Helplessness. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1975.
15.
WhiteO. R.HaringN. G.Exceptional teaching (2nd. ed.). Columbus, Oh.: Charles E. Merrill, 1980.
16.
YsseldykeJ. E.SalviaJ.Diagnostic-prescriptive teaching: Two models. Exceptional Children, 1974, 41, 181–185.
